Send me email updates about messages I've received on the site and the latest news from The CafeMom Team.
By signing up, you certify that you are female and accept the Terms of Service and have read the
Privacy Policy.

Could you lovely ladies help me out?

My Google skills seem to be lacking today (or it could just be this darn pregnancy brain LOL). I have gotten the Rhogam vaccine my past 2 pregnancies, but am having 2nd thoughts about it this time around. I can find information on the shot (what it's for, when to get it, ect.) but I cannot, for the life of me, find any negative information on it.

Would you be able to tell me the negatives of the Rhogam vaccine? Or help me find a good site that explains the bad?

I still have a ways away, only being 5 weeks LOL But I would like to know NOW so that I don't forget later on and have an awkward stare down with the doctor when they mention it LOL

It used to be FULL of mercury. The Rhogam site states now that the RhoGAM "ultra-filtered, PLUS." is latex free and thimerosal free and then says (contains no mercury). However, this can be very misleading. They DO NOT have an ingredients list, which they ought to have. Even though they are thimerosal free, it does not mean they are also mercury free. If protein was used to make the shot, some mercury will have bound tightly to it in the manufacturing process. It is important to know how it is being manufactured. Most no-live virus vaccines (and other shots) are still manufactured using thimerosal and it is "extracted out" afterwards. If this is the case with this shot, then it is possible that there is still residual mercury. The big question to ask is "Who policed this? Who made sure and who tested the product for the lack of thimerosal and mercury?"

In addition, Since no full disclosure is given at the website, I am wondering which preservative they used in place of thimerosal. Is is aluminum? This is also neuro-toxic and known to cause neuronal cell death, is cumulative in the body, and is suspect and causal in Altzheimers and breast cancer, and most likely causal in other forms of cancer. Another question to ask is what other ingredients are in there? Is it like other vaccines in containing formaldehyde and antifreeze?

I would write to the company and demand a full disclosure of ingredients before making an informed decision. The problem now is that they usually give this shot while the woman is still pregnant -often at 28 weeks, and the concern is not only to the effect on the mother but to the unborn child. The fact that the ingedients they describe on their website seems incomplete, and I believe every patient has the right to full disclosure. If they do not send you this from the package insert, then that is a red flag. There are also many possible side effects to consider.

However with all medications, vaccines as well as this shot and other prescribed drugs, the patient must weigh the risks against the benefits. The truth is that most of us would take a drug today if we were reasonably sure it would prevent us from dying tomorrow. However, if we take a shot today that may or may not be necessary, there is the potential of carrying a lifelong burden due to side effects, which can be permanent.

These decisions are never easy. I simply urge people to demand full disclosure. This was denied me on March 7, 2001, after I demanded my son not be given any thimerosal vaccines. The pediatrician deliberately lied to me aobut the ingredients. My son immediately changed and lost all speech -- as if someone had flipped a switch, and his immune system ws destroyed. We have dealt with chronic illness ever since. He lost the possiblility of ever having a normal childhood, and his care has cost us our life savings, retirement, and beyond. You cannot sue over vaccine damage. You need to know whether you can sue over PhoGAM damge before you do it, as this is something to consider. If I had been told this BEFORE submitting my son to this medical procedure (vaccines), I would have walked out. What sane person would submit to a preocedure for which the manufacturer is free of any liability for damage?

It used to be FULL of mercury. The Rhogam site states now that the RhoGAM "ultra-filtered, PLUS." is latex free and thimerosal free and then says (contains no mercury). However, this can be very misleading. They DO NOT have an ingredients list, which they ought to have. Even though they are thimerosal free, it does not mean they are also mercury free. If protein was used to make the shot, some mercury will have bound tightly to it in the manufacturing process. It is important to know how it is being manufactured. Most no-live virus vaccines (and other shots) are still manufactured using thimerosal and it is "extracted out" afterwards. If this is the case with this shot, then it is possible that there is still residual mercury. The big question to ask is "Who policed this? Who made sure and who tested the product for the lack of thimerosal and mercury?"

In addition, Since no full disclosure is given at the website, I am wondering which preservative they used in place of thimerosal. Is is aluminum? This is also neuro-toxic and known to cause neuronal cell death, is cumulative in the body, and is suspect and causal in Altzheimers and breast cancer, and most likely causal in other forms of cancer. Another question to ask is what other ingredients are in there? Is it like other vaccines in containing formaldehyde and antifreeze?

I would write to the company and demand a full disclosure of ingredients before making an informed decision. The problem now is that they usually give this shot while the woman is still pregnant -often at 28 weeks, and the concern is not only to the effect on the mother but to the unborn child. The fact that the ingedients they describe on their website seems incomplete, and I believe every patient has the right to full disclosure. If they do not send you this from the package insert, then that is a red flag. There are also many possible side effects to consider.

However with all medications, vaccines as well as this shot and other prescribed drugs, the patient must weigh the risks against the benefits. The truth is that most of us would take a drug today if we were reasonably sure it would prevent us from dying tomorrow. However, if we take a shot today that may or may not be necessary, there is the potential of carrying a lifelong burden due to side effects, which can be permanent.

These decisions are never easy. I simply urge people to demand full disclosure. This was denied me on March 7, 2001, after I demanded my son not be given any thimerosal vaccines. The pediatrician deliberately lied to me aobut the ingredients. My son immediately changed and lost all speech -- as if someone had flipped a switch, and his immune system ws destroyed. We have dealt with chronic illness ever since. He lost the possiblility of ever having a normal childhood, and his care has cost us our life savings, retirement, and beyond. You cannot sue over vaccine damage. You need to know whether you can sue over PhoGAM damge before you do it, as this is something to consider. If I had been told this BEFORE submitting my son to this medical procedure (vaccines), I would have walked out. What sane person would submit to a preocedure for which the manufacturer is free of any liability for damage?

Send me email updates about messages I've received on the site and the latest news from The CafeMom Team.
By signing up, you certify that you are female and accept the Terms of Service and have read the
Privacy Policy.